I was hoping that a time in jail might would allow time for him to grow up ideologically and change the way he think. I have some hope with Nattawut, unlike Veera so lets see what he will grow up to be.
Months ago, I have commented that UMNO’s backup plan is to go for a military led govt, much like Thailand’s. I still stand by that. I may be wrong, but unlikely.
Here’s a scenario;
1. General election results coming in indicates PKR likely winner.
2. Umno youth militant wing (yes, there is one and they are trained by the army – refer to PD by election news) takes to the streets.
3. Govt declares an emergency to “control” the situation
4. Election results suspended, and BN continues to rule with emergency powers
5. “Operation Lalang” AKA Mahathir’s handbook begins….
6. History repeats itself and Malaysia just became Thailand!
The report is clearly an international standard. It reveals the truth, whole truth of what happened in Thailand. The ICC will have to find out and inform the whole world what really happened. As for those criminals who are responsible for this massacre, they should be put to trial and received the most severe punishment. The crime against humanity cannot go unheeded. Not only those names that appear in the report, the ICC should trial those criminals who gave the order of the massacre. These powerful figures are the truth dictators who gave the order or the licence to kill. If these dictators are not punished, more crimes will be committed in the near future.
I suppose it could not possibly be due to something simple like the hospital is much more equipped than any palace to handle medical emergencies, could it? Well, it certainly cannot be because the king does not wish to put too much burden on the nation by having the hospital move resources to his palace, can it?
Barry, comment #7 I mix with a lot of the Thai people in UK.Last week we met up to visit a local show.We all talked about the “Monarchy”….and all were in agreement with me about the “hate” now surfacing which is explained by Giles.All these Thai born also agreed too that….and I qoute; “but we dare not say anything”…wake up Barry.
What a waste of time and effort!
It all ended up with a big PR victory for the regime in power. First Prayuth intimidated so much that only a few hundred dared to show up. Later Abhiisit was smiling and shaking hands with Ban Ki-moon and showing the world:
“See, the people can demonstrate here; we let them do it; they have got all their democratic rights. We are so nice to our people. We respect and protect and promote human rights here and everywhere. Emergency decree is only for the bad terrorists.”
And Ban Ki-moon was smiling and congratulating Thailand’s efforts for human rights. He finally expressed regret for the flood victims but he didn’t lose a single word about the 91 dead and 2000 injured and political prisoners and so on…
He only said: The redshirts and stuff are an internal affair.”
That’s the answer to all the letters given to him.
That’s it!
In the end it was just a big show and an even bigger and sweeter victory for the regime; it all happened exactly as they wanted it to happen and the redhsirts had no choice other than to play nicely in tune and help Abhisit and Prayuth to stage their big show and win.
It was so foreseeable and so disgusting and that’s why I didn’t bother to go there today.
Thank you ajarn Somsak, you’ve provided a very good way to explain the power structure in Thailand. I’ve been attempting to explain this very complicated relation between each power within the country.
Giles should less hyperbole and avoid classic leftist rhetorical terms that are used so often they mean nothing like the word “fascist.”
From my experience up north and at these recent protests I never got any feeling that “millions” of these red shirts were republicans who hated the King. I also didn’t get the feeling that they adored him the same way that the elite do. He is simply their king who they respect and that’s it. The red shirts I spoke with would like to contain the abuse of the monarchy/people around the monarchy, not get rid of it.
I remind a very royalist person I know that red, yellow, or pink–they are all very Thai at the end of the day in their acceptance of a king.
“The King is openly verbally insulted and criticised in public, especially when demonstrations take place.”
Could Giles provide some hard evidence for this? A transcript of a speech, an excerpt? I’d be very interested to actually read for myself what is considered an insult.
That the monarchy, the military, and the bureaucratic elite exist in a symbiotic relationship points more to the truth than focusing on which is more in control. All three anoint one another in different ways.
Giles’ opinions would carry more weight if they were more nuanced. CRES probably celebrates that he writes so bluntly because it gives them all the more reason to crack down in the name of saving the monarchy and the Thai nation.
Perhaps we should be reminded that Avudh Panananda wrote in his “Da Torpedo’s downfall a warning to the like-minded” article on 1st September, 2009 in Thai English language daily The Nation the following:
“Daranee had tarnished the reputation of Their Majesties with malicious intent to sway the crowds to lose their reverence and trust in the monarchy.
Daranee was penalised with a combined jail term of 18 years for three counts of insulting remarks, each carrying six-year imprisonment.
As Daranee languishes in her cell, she may reflect on whether she has accomplished anything worthwhile in return for her conviction. How many will remember her message other than the legacy of her foul mouth? ”
More than one year has passed and Avudh Panananda sounds as desperate as ever…
The pro-Thaksin camp launched veiled attacks blaming the King for condoning the coup. Under the red-shirt banner, the bashing of the monarchy gained momentum.
The yellow-shirt movement, meanwhile, seized the opportunity to sway the sentiment by portraying Thaksin and the red-shirt movement as conspiring to undermine the monarchy.
No mention of the 800 pound gorilla : the Military.
The only ‘justification’ for the Military’s recurrent, periodic destruction of not just democratic government but of government itself, of any attempt at the rule of law, is its supposed role as ‘defender’ of the monarchy.
The Thai Military is not the defender of the Thai monarchy, it is the controller and manipulator of the Thai monarchy. The hider behind the skirts of the Thai monarchy, as it murders Thais, again and again and again.
Enough with the monarchy already. The problem is the Thai Military, the sowers of death, destruction, and chaos in Thailand for the past eight decades.
Unless and until they are permanently removed from power in Thailand it will be as it has been in Thailand for another eight decades.
It’s interesting that Les Abbey (#4) would suggest that today we would have had a ‘Papa Doc Shinawatra and his Tonton Macoute dressed in red’, if there was no 2006 coup. Voodoo?
My feeling was Thaksin would emulate: (1) optimistic scenario – Venuezuela’s Valdez , or, (2) less optimistic – Philippines Marcos, or, (3) very pessimistic – Zimbabwe’s Mugabe. Venuela, Philippines and Zimbabe are all republican democracies, right?
Giles gets deserved airplay because nobody articulated the military triangulation dynamic better. His consistency and coherency are an anxiety to the bildungsphilister. A leitmotif to their impending loss.
That is loss of respect, loss of credibility, loss of status and finally loss of wealth not to mention the plot.
The Royal Thai Army has its own poetic consistency. Periodically massacring Thai citizens with asymmetric force while safeguarding with first class whitewash. A matter of least vulgarity to those most disinclined to sharing the peoples burden no less.
Instead of applauding he who speaks truth to power, the calumny commentariat debase reason, side with might and bully in unison. They are intolerant to pluralism, ignorant of Marxism, drunk on capitalism while hallucinating on history.
Why else would one solitary exiled voice continue to rock every institution his attention focuses on.
Somsak is correct on this. While I respect Ji’s political activism, he is wrong on the power of the monarchy. Back in 2008, in the Journal of Contemporary Asia, where there was a review of Ji’s “A coup for the rich,” this criticism was made in a pretty favourable review: “One criticism of this chapter – and much of the book’s analysis – is the omission of a discussion of the source of the ruling class’s power. For example, this chapter might have included a little more detail of the
monarchy’s fabulous wealth or the palace’s re-emergence as one of Thailand’s major capitalist business groups.”
I was interested and surprised to see a copy of THE REVOLUTIONARY KING in Kinokuniya bookshop in Emporium, Bangkok 3 months ago. More recently I noticed another copy in a Chiang Mai bookshop.
What’s more, I just picked up a copy of SAYING THE UNSAYABLE in a different Chiang Mai bookshop. Would be interested to hear other’s reactions to this book and/or a review.
I am constantly surprised at the amount of ‘airplay’ given to Giles Ungpakorn on this site, which I otherwise enjoy and check regularly. His academic work reads like political pamplets.
When Giles writes we always have the same problem. It’s not how it is, it’s how he would like it to be. We no longer have facts, or the truth. We have propaganda.
So in Giles’s mind we have a republican Issan and a revolutionary red shirt movement just in need of the correct leadership. Neither of course is true. Just taking the latter, if we could see one of the major red shirt leaders, you know the ones that get to speak from the main stage, who wasn’t Thaksin’s man we could start to have some faith in Giles’s writings.
Writing from England Giles could maybe inform us that the man planning on spending the Christmas holidays with his old school friend Abhisit, is far more dangerous to the international working class than the host.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Review of Nattawut Saikua biography
I was hoping that a time in jail might would allow time for him to grow up ideologically and change the way he think. I have some hope with Nattawut, unlike Veera so lets see what he will grow up to be.
Thailand’s monarchy and divisiveness
One of th ironies of lesse majeste is that the King himself is bound by it, forcing him to be above politics.
UMNO dies defending Putrajaya
Months ago, I have commented that UMNO’s backup plan is to go for a military led govt, much like Thailand’s. I still stand by that. I may be wrong, but unlikely.
Here’s a scenario;
1. General election results coming in indicates PKR likely winner.
2. Umno youth militant wing (yes, there is one and they are trained by the army – refer to PD by election news) takes to the streets.
3. Govt declares an emergency to “control” the situation
4. Election results suspended, and BN continues to rule with emergency powers
5. “Operation Lalang” AKA Mahathir’s handbook begins….
6. History repeats itself and Malaysia just became Thailand!
….. Neptunian goes back to Neptune…..
Robert Amsterdam’s preliminary submission to the International Criminal Court
The report is clearly an international standard. It reveals the truth, whole truth of what happened in Thailand. The ICC will have to find out and inform the whole world what really happened. As for those criminals who are responsible for this massacre, they should be put to trial and received the most severe punishment. The crime against humanity cannot go unheeded. Not only those names that appear in the report, the ICC should trial those criminals who gave the order of the massacre. These powerful figures are the truth dictators who gave the order or the licence to kill. If these dictators are not punished, more crimes will be committed in the near future.
King Bhumibol’s enduring hospitalisation
I suppose it could not possibly be due to something simple like the hospital is much more equipped than any palace to handle medical emergencies, could it? Well, it certainly cannot be because the king does not wish to put too much burden on the nation by having the hospital move resources to his palace, can it?
Robert Amsterdam’s preliminary submission to the International Criminal Court
excellent to see this progressing
the document is valuable as a concise and accurate statement of events
Review of Nattawut Saikua biography
Nattawut
clear, straightforward, inspirational
and, unlike many “inspirational orators”, trustworthy
immense value to the good cause of power to the people democracy in Thailand
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Barry, comment #7 I mix with a lot of the Thai people in UK.Last week we met up to visit a local show.We all talked about the “Monarchy”….and all were in agreement with me about the “hate” now surfacing which is explained by Giles.All these Thai born also agreed too that….and I qoute; “but we dare not say anything”…wake up Barry.
Letter to Ban Ki-moon on human rights in Thailand
What a waste of time and effort!
It all ended up with a big PR victory for the regime in power. First Prayuth intimidated so much that only a few hundred dared to show up. Later Abhiisit was smiling and shaking hands with Ban Ki-moon and showing the world:
“See, the people can demonstrate here; we let them do it; they have got all their democratic rights. We are so nice to our people. We respect and protect and promote human rights here and everywhere. Emergency decree is only for the bad terrorists.”
And Ban Ki-moon was smiling and congratulating Thailand’s efforts for human rights. He finally expressed regret for the flood victims but he didn’t lose a single word about the 91 dead and 2000 injured and political prisoners and so on…
He only said: The redshirts and stuff are an internal affair.”
That’s the answer to all the letters given to him.
That’s it!
In the end it was just a big show and an even bigger and sweeter victory for the regime; it all happened exactly as they wanted it to happen and the redhsirts had no choice other than to play nicely in tune and help Abhisit and Prayuth to stage their big show and win.
It was so foreseeable and so disgusting and that’s why I didn’t bother to go there today.
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Somsak Jeamteerasakul – 10
Thank you ajarn Somsak, you’ve provided a very good way to explain the power structure in Thailand. I’ve been attempting to explain this very complicated relation between each power within the country.
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Giles should less hyperbole and avoid classic leftist rhetorical terms that are used so often they mean nothing like the word “fascist.”
From my experience up north and at these recent protests I never got any feeling that “millions” of these red shirts were republicans who hated the King. I also didn’t get the feeling that they adored him the same way that the elite do. He is simply their king who they respect and that’s it. The red shirts I spoke with would like to contain the abuse of the monarchy/people around the monarchy, not get rid of it.
I remind a very royalist person I know that red, yellow, or pink–they are all very Thai at the end of the day in their acceptance of a king.
“The King is openly verbally insulted and criticised in public, especially when demonstrations take place.”
Could Giles provide some hard evidence for this? A transcript of a speech, an excerpt? I’d be very interested to actually read for myself what is considered an insult.
That the monarchy, the military, and the bureaucratic elite exist in a symbiotic relationship points more to the truth than focusing on which is more in control. All three anoint one another in different ways.
Giles’ opinions would carry more weight if they were more nuanced. CRES probably celebrates that he writes so bluntly because it gives them all the more reason to crack down in the name of saving the monarchy and the Thai nation.
Thailand’s monarchy and divisiveness
Perhaps we should be reminded that Avudh Panananda wrote in his “Da Torpedo’s downfall a warning to the like-minded” article on 1st September, 2009 in Thai English language daily The Nation the following:
“Daranee had tarnished the reputation of Their Majesties with malicious intent to sway the crowds to lose their reverence and trust in the monarchy.
Daranee was penalised with a combined jail term of 18 years for three counts of insulting remarks, each carrying six-year imprisonment.
As Daranee languishes in her cell, she may reflect on whether she has accomplished anything worthwhile in return for her conviction. How many will remember her message other than the legacy of her foul mouth? ”
More than one year has passed and Avudh Panananda sounds as desperate as ever…
Thailand’s monarchy and divisiveness
The two lines after Nich’s quote:
No mention of the 800 pound gorilla : the Military.
The only ‘justification’ for the Military’s recurrent, periodic destruction of not just democratic government but of government itself, of any attempt at the rule of law, is its supposed role as ‘defender’ of the monarchy.
The Thai Military is not the defender of the Thai monarchy, it is the controller and manipulator of the Thai monarchy. The hider behind the skirts of the Thai monarchy, as it murders Thais, again and again and again.
Enough with the monarchy already. The problem is the Thai Military, the sowers of death, destruction, and chaos in Thailand for the past eight decades.
Unless and until they are permanently removed from power in Thailand it will be as it has been in Thailand for another eight decades.
Thailand’s monarchy and divisiveness
It’s interesting that Les Abbey (#4) would suggest that today we would have had a ‘Papa Doc Shinawatra and his Tonton Macoute dressed in red’, if there was no 2006 coup. Voodoo?
My feeling was Thaksin would emulate: (1) optimistic scenario – Venuezuela’s Valdez , or, (2) less optimistic – Philippines Marcos, or, (3) very pessimistic – Zimbabwe’s Mugabe. Venuela, Philippines and Zimbabe are all republican democracies, right?
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Nontok:
Giles gets deserved airplay because nobody articulated the military triangulation dynamic better. His consistency and coherency are an anxiety to the bildungsphilister. A leitmotif to their impending loss.
That is loss of respect, loss of credibility, loss of status and finally loss of wealth not to mention the plot.
The Royal Thai Army has its own poetic consistency. Periodically massacring Thai citizens with asymmetric force while safeguarding with first class whitewash. A matter of least vulgarity to those most disinclined to sharing the peoples burden no less.
Instead of applauding he who speaks truth to power, the calumny commentariat debase reason, side with might and bully in unison. They are intolerant to pluralism, ignorant of Marxism, drunk on capitalism while hallucinating on history.
Why else would one solitary exiled voice continue to rock every institution his attention focuses on.
Thailand’s monarchy and divisiveness
Simple or simplistic Les?
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Somsak is correct on this. While I respect Ji’s political activism, he is wrong on the power of the monarchy. Back in 2008, in the Journal of Contemporary Asia, where there was a review of Ji’s “A coup for the rich,” this criticism was made in a pretty favourable review: “One criticism of this chapter – and much of the book’s analysis – is the omission of a discussion of the source of the ruling class’s power. For example, this chapter might have included a little more detail of the
monarchy’s fabulous wealth or the palace’s re-emergence as one of Thailand’s major capitalist business groups.”
King Bhumibol’s enduring hospitalisation
TPP is blocked on True in Bangkok.
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
Nigella #8 –
I was interested and surprised to see a copy of THE REVOLUTIONARY KING in Kinokuniya bookshop in Emporium, Bangkok 3 months ago. More recently I noticed another copy in a Chiang Mai bookshop.
What’s more, I just picked up a copy of SAYING THE UNSAYABLE in a different Chiang Mai bookshop. Would be interested to hear other’s reactions to this book and/or a review.
I am constantly surprised at the amount of ‘airplay’ given to Giles Ungpakorn on this site, which I otherwise enjoy and check regularly. His academic work reads like political pamplets.
Ji Ungpakorn on the military and the monarchy
When Giles writes we always have the same problem. It’s not how it is, it’s how he would like it to be. We no longer have facts, or the truth. We have propaganda.
So in Giles’s mind we have a republican Issan and a revolutionary red shirt movement just in need of the correct leadership. Neither of course is true. Just taking the latter, if we could see one of the major red shirt leaders, you know the ones that get to speak from the main stage, who wasn’t Thaksin’s man we could start to have some faith in Giles’s writings.
Writing from England Giles could maybe inform us that the man planning on spending the Christmas holidays with his old school friend Abhisit, is far more dangerous to the international working class than the host.